From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: dangers of bots on the mailing lists was Re: divide error in ___bpf_prog_run
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 20:09:30 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180118010930.GE6948@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180118002111.b7ejjd2adunmkooj@ast-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 04:21:13PM -0800, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
>
> If syzkaller can only test one tree than linux-next should be the one.
Well, there's been some controversy about that. The problem is that
it's often not clear if this is long-standing bug, or a bug which is
in a particular subsystem tree --- and if so, *which* subsystem tree,
etc. So it gets blasted to linux-kernel, and to get_maintainer.pl,
which is often not accurate --- since the location of the crash
doesn't necessarily point out where the problem originated, and hence
who should look at the syzbot report. And so this has caused
some.... irritation.
> There is some value of testing stable trees, but any developer
> will first ask for a reproducer in the latest, so usefulness of
> reporting such bugs will be limited.
What I suggested was to test Linus's tree, and then when a problem is
found, and syzkaller has a reliable repro, to *then* try to see if it
*also* shows up in the LTS kernels.
- Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-18 1:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-13 1:58 divide error in ___bpf_prog_run syzbot
2018-01-14 0:16 ` Daniel Borkmann
2018-01-14 16:03 ` David Miller
2018-01-17 9:32 ` dangers of bots on the mailing lists was " Pavel Machek
2018-01-17 9:35 ` syzbot
2018-01-17 9:35 ` syzbot
2018-01-17 9:45 ` dangers of bots on the mailing lists was " Dmitry Vyukov
2018-01-17 9:49 ` Pavel Machek
2018-01-17 10:11 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2018-01-18 10:57 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2018-01-18 13:41 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2018-01-17 9:48 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2018-01-17 9:52 ` Pavel Machek
2018-01-17 10:03 ` Florian Westphal
2018-01-17 9:49 ` Daniel Borkmann
2018-01-17 11:09 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2018-01-17 20:47 ` Theodore Ts'o
2018-01-18 0:21 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2018-01-18 1:09 ` Theodore Ts'o [this message]
2018-01-18 1:18 ` Joe Perches
2018-01-18 1:46 ` Eric Biggers
2018-01-18 2:35 ` Joe Perches
2018-01-18 13:01 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2018-01-18 13:06 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2018-01-18 14:05 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-01-22 13:31 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2018-01-18 14:10 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-01-22 8:08 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2018-01-18 13:10 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2018-01-18 14:46 ` Daniel Borkmann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180118010930.GE6948@thunk.org \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.